Would it be acceptable to serve prosecco instead of Champagne at my wedding?
Beast, isn’t it? The short answer is no. The awful truth is that prosecco isn’t really prosecco— whatever the bleating of the Waitrose classes, it’s just I-can’t-afford-champagne-so-ciao! Meanwhile, thanks to the cunning of the great houses, Champagne has such a mystique attached to it that COUNTRY LIFE spells it with a capital C. (Craven of them, I always think.)
Advertising and litigation both cost un bras et une jambe, which is probably why it’s so outrageously expensive and why weddings generally cost far too much.
I’d avoid both—vive la différence! English sparkling wine (no capitals, but what can you do?) is delicious and has no ignominy attached. Before the 19th century, hock—cheap as chips, these days—was le bevvy juste. Failing this, adulterate your prosecco with cheap brandy, Angostura bitters and a sugar-lump, then call it a Champagne cocktail—achingly chic—and relax. Besides, your guests will be so pie-eyed, they won’t know what they’re drinking.